Hey circare,
Always enjoy chatting with you - that's the only way we all toss around ideas!
However, criticising the WTS Corp. for acting as a business corporation does not make a lot of sense to me. They do not claim to be anything else but a business org. for the financing and organising of the publishing and preaching work of the religious organisation Jehovah's Witnesses.
That is not the only way the WTBTS acts as a business corporation. Right now, there is a nasty child sexual abuse case going before the Supreme Court with the WTBTS having to defend itself and its elders for allowing a confessed sexual offender to remain as a brother in good standing, and to my knowledge, not notifying the police (may not have been law at that time.)
[url= http://jehovah.to/legal/general/bryanr.htm]Bryan R. v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society[/url]
This case has also been discussed on h2o, and I believe, Witnesses.net. There are other experiences of sexual abuse dismissed by the WTBTS, and/or by the elders, btw. Many found on the web, several happened within my family and within my congregation and within this forum.
They have a large Legal Department to defend themselves against every conceivable situation - including their own sheep. I know, due to a business deal with our local body of elders gone very badly, our lawyer had the occasion to speak with one of their lawyers. And he was given the "run around" and a fine sermon on Mathew. Nothing, however, was said about the merits, just the lack thereof, of our situation. The Legal Department and Service Department told our Circuit Overseer not to speak to us. They would handle us. He told us this after calling Bethel. That has been 1.5 years ago and the silence from them continues. We got the idea.
Their lawyer did say, however, that we could sue our PO - said elders were sued all the time. That was not the WTBTS's problem. (meaning sue them - not us). They also said that elders were not "ordained ministers" and as such, the WTBTS was not responsible for their actions, being legal or breaking the law (meaning sue them - not us).
In other words, the WTBTS Corporation looks after themselves and earns money for the organization called Jehovah's Witnesses. We, being sheep, and under the care of unordained ministers, are left to fend for ourselves.
Isn't this situation quite similar to what Jesus condemned the pharisees for? The people were sheep without a shepherd? A sheep, as a lamb, would be spoonfed - and that's fine - he doesn't necessarily understand the ramifications of what is being shoved down his throat - he just opens his mouth and the shepherd puts it in.
As he grows older, he becomes more selective - perhaps he doesn't agree with what's being spoonfed him anymore? Does the shepherd have the godgiven right, godgiven mandate, to throw him out because of this?
If the shepherd is shepherding the flock, and one of the sheep decides to be real nasty and attack another lamb, and the lamb complains - does the loving shepherd say "I have no control over this sheep - even though I spoonfed the lamb into believing this sheep has God's spirit and should be obeyed." Does the shepherd turn a deaf ear to the crys of injustice?
There is always a problem when religion mixes with big business - the WTBTS has told us so. The WTBTS has done this, and now they should answer for their actions - just like they decry the churches of Babylon the Great for doing the same. They are, in fact, acting the same. They told us they were different - and demanded us to behave differently. They are behaving indecently, imho.
I will politely, or impolitely, continue to learn and discuss the WTBTS and the Bible. Perhaps I'm passed the spoonfed phrase of my spirituality. The WTBTS turned me away when I was in need - not fair to cry wolf when I, or thousands of others, speak outloud of their actions against us.
They started the game when they called themselves the Faithful and Discreet Slave (Charles T. Russell). We just continue to play by expanded rules.
waiting - sorry for being so wordy - religion just get a person thinking, huh?
Edited by - waiting on 31 August 2000 8:18:22